2018 (5) TMI 1465 - AT - Service Tax

Tribunal Remands Case for Further Review on Service Classification Appeal

Garden Silk Mills Ltd Versus C.C.E. & S.T. -Surat-i

The Tribunal remanded the case back to the Commissioner (Appeals) due to inadequacy in findings and lack of proper analysis in the order. The appellant's ... Business support services - whether the provision of Refrigeration and Air Cooling facility of chilled water by the appellant to M/s STML for their manufacturing process would be taxable service under the category of 'Support Service of Business and Commerce'? - non-speaking order. Held that: - after incorporating the show cause notice and the adjudication order and the submissions made by the appellants in their appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner (Appeals) has passed a cryptic, non-speaking order without giving any analysis of the legal issues involved in the interpretation of the activity being undertaken by the appellants. In such a situation / where the first appellate authority has given no findings on the issues involved and the order is bereft of any kind of judicial analysis of the submissions made by the appellant before the first appellate authority, it would be in the interest of the justice that the matter is remanded back to Commissioner (Appeals) for de novo consideration. Appeal allowed by way of remand. Issues:1. Classification of services provided by the appellant as 'Support Service of Business and Commerce.'2. Adequacy of findings in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals).Analysis:1. The appeal revolved around the classification of services provided by the appellant, focusing on whether the provision of Refrigeration and Air Cooling facility of chilled water to a company for their manufacturing process falls under the taxable service category of 'Support Service of Business and Commerce.' The Commissioner (Appeals) was criticized for passing a non-speaking order devoid of any analysis of the legal issues involved in the interpretation of the activity undertaken by the appellant. The Tribunal noted that the order lacked proper findings on the issues raised and failed to provide a judicial analysis of the submissions made by the appellant. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh consideration, emphasizing the need for a detailed examination of the issues and a proper analysis of the submissions presented by the appellant. This remand was deemed necessary in the interest of justice to ensure a fair evaluation of the case.2. The Tribunal highlighted the inadequacy of the findings in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), pointing out the lack of a thorough analysis of the legal issues and factual submissions. By remanding the case, the Tribunal aimed to provide the appellant with an opportunity to present their case effectively before the Commissioner (Appeals) and receive a well-reasoned decision based on a comprehensive evaluation of the issues raised in the show cause notices and the adjudication order. The decision to remand the appeal was made to ensure a fair and just consideration of the matter, allowing for a more detailed examination of the legal and factual aspects of the case to reach a well-founded conclusion.